BrightGene has continuously received a Wind ESG A rating, with a comprehensive score of 7.53

According to Tongbi Finance, on May 29, 2026, BrightGene (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. (stock abbreviation: BrightGene, code: 688166.SH) received a Wind ESG rating of A, unchanged from the previous period. The company's comprehensive score is 7.53, higher than the pharmaceutical industry average of 5.85. It ranks 27th among 280 companies in the pharmaceutical industry, placing it in the top 9.64% of the industry. The scores for the environmental, social, and governance dimensions are 4.65, 7.17, and 6.80, respectively.

Compared to the previous rating, the comprehensive score decreased from 7.73 to 7.53, a drop of 0.20 points. The contribution from management practices fell from 4.74 to 4.54, a decrease of 0.20 points. The contribution from controversy events remained stable at 2.99. By dimension, the environmental score decreased by 0.96 points, the social score decreased by 0.30 points, and the governance score increased by 0.34 points.

Rating Observation

In the environmental dimension, the company has demonstrated systematic capabilities and performance in waste and wastewater management. The company has obtained ISO 14001 environmental management system certification, with a waste recycling rate of 54.33%, totaling 257 tons of recycled waste, and has established multiple management regulations such as the "General Industrial Solid Waste Management System" and "Hazardous Waste Management System." In terms of wastewater management, the company's total wastewater discharge for the year was 545,700.2 tons, with industrial wastewater treated through "biochemical treatment reverse osmosis" processes meeting discharge standards, and some softened water being reused for landscaping irrigation. Additionally, the company has implemented online monitoring facilities for waste and wastewater management to monitor discharge data in real-time to ensure compliance. However, there is still significant room for improvement in information disclosure in the raw material management area, particularly regarding the use of green materials and improving raw material utilization rates.

In the social dimension, the company has demonstrated strong research and development and innovation capabilities, forming a relatively complete system for product quality management. The company's R&D investment accounts for as much as 48.49% of operating income, with a total of 148 effective patents, and R&D staff accounting for 22.83%. The company has also been certified as a high-tech enterprise and participated in the preparation of the national standard "Core Metadata for E-commerce Pharmaceuticals." In terms of product quality management, the company's GMP production quality system has been certified by the U.S. FDA and EU drug regulatory agencies, implementing full-process quality control based on the "Quality by Design (QbD)" concept, and has established the "Drug Recall Management Procedures," conducting 1-2 simulated product recalls annually to optimize emergency response capabilities. However, the disclosure of customer management system certification and employee development and training management systems remains insufficient, which may affect the completeness of the social dimension's performance.

In the governance dimension, the company's governance structure exhibits certain characteristics of independence and diversity. The proportion of independent directors on the board is 36.36%, with female directors accounting for 54.55%, and the attendance rate of board members is 100%. The independence of the audit committee is high, with independent directors making up 100%, and the chair is an independent non-executive director, with the convener being a professional accountant However, the phenomenon of the CEO also serving as the chairman and the overlap of members of the compensation committee with executives may pose certain challenges to the governance and checks-and-balances mechanism. In addition, the dissent rate for shareholder meeting proposals is 47.10%, reflecting that some proposals may be controversial, warranting further observation to assess shareholder approval of corporate governance decisions.

Content generated by AI on May 29, 2026, please verify important information